gender views cause of incel.

[Neddy Bate]

Do you think it strengthens an argument to write "Period!" after an argument? Or perhaps, " 'Nuff said!"?

We have the best people looking into that right now, --the very best people-- and when they report back tomorrow or next year, it's going to be tremendous. Just huge. Believe me. It's true.

 

[gamelord]

There is nothing wrong with a one night stand but it's not a right, something you get just by wanting it. It takes the consent of a woman and she may not want a one-night stand.

Obviously. Why would I want a woman who is disgusted while we are having sex?
It's just we live in a culture where both feminism and patriarchy shames sex and lustful thought. It's a land of insane Puritans running amok. They have magazines in the grocery store that talk about sex and sex positions, but lo-and behold if you actually talk about sex out loud, you are a creep and a perv. It's american split-minded insanity. It's like how Japan is sexually dysfunctional and incel, but has panties at vending machine, obsessed with porn, but the genitals are pixellated, a country that is completely sexually dysfunctional.

You don't live in a culture where males get zero love. Plenty of males get love. You don't even consider yourself male in some of your statements.

In America, the land where 50% of marriages end in divorce?

That society doesn't exist. You aren't the only one with mixed gender/sexual id combinations such as yours. Finding more of those people might be more fulfilling in terms of improving the odds of finding a like minded soul.

Many of these people are super cruel and unfriendly.

 

[gamelord]

I could draw a little shape for you and say, "This is a rune; it stands, more or less, for the letter O and means, approximately, 'heritage'." Indeed, there was a time when all that meant to me was an old book on Elder Futhark sitting on my shelf, and that the Suebians were on the map in my current game of FreeCiv. However, during this period when American Nazis claim the rune as an identity symbol, I'm probably not getting it on a t-shirt, or posting the insane photo of the Suebian navy lining up over two hundred ships in the middle of the ocean prior to invading a Marathi outpost. I know, it's a little thing, but a significant political movement has arisen, and claimed this symbol, and that's how it's going to be for a while unless American society decides we really are going to curbstomp all the Nazis and be done with it.

Similarly, the incel movement is declared, has racked up some impressive threats, and even drawn a body count. One pathetic dude wander in and crying about how, "The word in-cel stands for In-voluntary Cel-ibate" is what it is, but when he is that ignorant of history and that hostile to actual discourse, no, you're not impressing anyone, especially yourself.

The swastika was stolen from ancient Hindus. Do they delete it because someone they dont approve of uses their identity? No they continue to use it, and so swastika doesn't always mean Nazi. It is only ignorant people that do not know a swastika means other things.
For example, an ignorant person believes Aryan is something Hitler made up, when it actually refers to the Indo-Aryan people and not just Germans.
There will always be ignorant people, who do not understand the meaning of words.

When you say you "don't know how this discussion started to be about", you are overlooking your own make-believe about "fat, ugly chicks". When you do that, functionally arguing that you don't know how this discussion started to be about any particular thing you have to say↑, people notice.

People notice how you derail discussions to be about mexicans when it had nothing to do with mexicans, or even racism for that matter. The topic was mainly about sexism and double standards.

There comes a point at which you make the point: Any excuse to complain about women.

Same as you make an excuse to complain about men?

You have a terrible view of men.

Not as terrible as yours?
I mean on one hand, you blame men for all the worlds problems.
Then, on the other hand, when I have a terrible view of men, you shame me.
No way to win with you.

Beer talk. It's easy enough to suspect you don't actually understand what that means, but, yes, it's actually quite common. A lazy period spent at the pub is actually one of the more common community bonds developed between people in our societal history.

That tells me a lot about you.

Wrong, and wrong.

Pure make-believe.

There's always risk, but if it is as you say, the bad boys wouldn't need to pretend to be nice guys. And betas, as such, are just as dangerous or not as any other.

Sexual attraction happens under stress. This is an evolutionary mechanism. The stress must not be too high, paranoia kills sexual attraction. And yet the stress must not be too low, as it instills a lull of complacency.

Actually, I admit I'm curious why you use the word "transsexual", and what you mean by it. Outside the Rocky Horror Show, it just doesn't come up much, these days.

So you are ignorant too, has been noted.

You really don't know, do you?

And, see, that's the thing; to some degree, people are moved to pity. But if there is a way to help you emerge from isolation, one of the first things you need to do is stop radiating danger. Here, stuff like this just glows with danger:
This is why.

This is why you fail.

This is why people trade out their pity for the easy scorn shown just another two-bit bigot stewing in tears and demanding entitlement: "I doubt Eliot would have ever actually killed his girlfriend," you wrote, "if he was ever provided one that is."

Women aren't assets to be doled out to rapemongering brats who consider decent social behavior some manner of oppression. Figure it out.

So me being a compassionate person, trying to save lives, makes me dangerous and toxic? Funny how every good deed does not go unpunished.

Reminds me of yesterday, my friend say a German on TV trying to save some kids live, and my friend immediately accused the german of looking like a gestapo nazi. Funny how people judge you based on their immediate feelings, rather than any kind of logic or reason.
I get it, saying the word "Eliot Rodgers" makes you feel immediately uncomfortable, and triggers your animal flight or flight primordial instincts.

Doesn't matter if I say I don't agree with his views, mentioning the devil's name enough is enough to trigger a full on panic attack.

Most of what you say is nonsense. You accuse Eliot Rodgers of being a rapemonger, when in actuality he was the exact opposite of a rapist. Even when he went on a killing spree he didn't rape anyone. Eliot's idea of a utopia was a man only world, a world without women. Not a world of rape. So you are spouting nonsense, as per usual. Eliots main complaint, was that women only flirted with perfect specimens, and didn't give many men the time of day. That some men got so much positive attention, while other's got none. I agree with him on this issue, what I don't agree with are his other views, such as a man only world.

But feel free to go on your slanted tirade. Eliot never demanded for women to be handed as assets, his complaint was that women, of their own free will, would not take an interest in him of their own accord. Now I understand that in your mind, me saying the word "provided" could be interpreted as some mysterious entity handing out girlfriends, but that is not what I meant by it, and I assumed sane person would have understood but I guess not.

A gun is designed to kill. Is that what a man is?

How do you think she would respond if he explicitly told her at the outset he was perfectly willing to kill her if he decided he had a reason?

A man shouldn't kill his wife unless she does something very extreme, such as try to kill him first.
I dont believe cheaters ought to be killed, I believe it is wrong to kill someone for following natural urges and instincts.

Far as guns being men, I think the purpose of men is to kill, to think, and to build, enemy men and animals. The role of the man is to defend the tribe, attack enemy men, and hunt and kill animals.
But we live in a civilized age, an age where there isn't supposed to be pain and suffering. So the role of man is no longer to kill, but to build and to think. But again if this is the age of pain and suffering, then why is it that society only cares about ending wars, but does not give empathy to the pain and suffering to lonely, sexually frustrated males.

 

[Tiassa]

It's just we live in a culture where both feminism and patriarchy shames sex and lustful thought.

No. You need to stop making believe.

Start dealing with reality.

If you can't, do let us know. See, one of the reasons people are receiving you so harshly is that we presume each other competent, that the other actually has a clue, until otherwise established.

And this is important: I have yet to see, in your three-hundred plus posts, anything that couldn't be been posted by a bot, or that isn't generic trolling.

And the thing about being angry and just wanting to despise people is that they will eventually notice.

How do you think anyone should take someone who behaves precisely in a manner as to preclude what he claims to want?

It's not funny; people will eventually change the channel, and give their attention to something more interesting: Too bad, so sad, don't care.

But no, you're not going to pick up many chicks when you go out of your way to present a threat.

 

[gamelord]

No. You need to stop making believe.

Start dealing with reality.

If you can't, do let us know. See, one of the reasons people are receiving you so harshly is that we presume each other competent, that the other actually has a clue, until otherwise established.

And this is important: I have yet to see, in your three-hundred plus posts, anything that couldn't be been posted by a bot, or that isn't generic trolling.

And the thing about being angry and just wanting to despise people is that they will eventually notice.

How do you think anyone should take someone who behaves precisely in a manner as to preclude what he claims to want?

It's not funny; people will eventually change the channel, and give their attention to something more interesting: Too bad, so sad, don't care.

But no, you're not going to pick up many chicks when you go out of your way to present a threat.

Nice lines there, but doesn't actually posit a counter argument.

If I sound like a bot to you then you are actually ignorant of how chat bots actually sound like.

 

[TheFrogger]

Gamelord. Society WAS originally all male until God castrated one male for killing his partner. ☺

 

[gamelord]

Interestingly, you got it in the parenthetic note. Too bad you preceded that quote by dismissing the point as irrelevant. See, the thing is that if the "Nazi [points] out the flaws in the Jew religion, or flaws in the gene code of semetic [sic] ancestry", we're going to check the presuppositions, and review the data. (Hint: Both the points you suggested are subjective measures.)

K here is the video.

Part of the reason the question of how men and women have sex with each other is important involves the question of why who pays for what. And in that context, it's absolutely ridiculous that you would sit here and bawl so loudly about something you don't actually understand.

Meanwhile:

• Has anyone ever gone to a hospital seeking medical treatment for internal injuries inflicted by your penis?

• Have you ever "accidentally" choked your partner to unconsciousness in heated passion while dorsally mounted?

• Have you ever "unintentionally" opened your partner's forehead or lip driving their head into the furniture while bangin' away?​

Oh, right. Sorry.

Anyway, what was that you were saying? "If gender roles were reversed, and men had sex with women...but demanded women pay men to have sex with them...would that make any sense?"

Finally, you've made an actual post that wasn't complete nonsense.

Yes, fair enough, women have more of those risks. However, on the other hand, it is they who tend to be attracted to those kind of brutish males who would do that to them in the first place. And no the nice guy, beta male thing is not a complete myth. People try to create a myth that "nice-guys" are really bad people, and that women don't date bullies and jocks, and then they use Eliot Rodgers to "prove" that most "nice-guys" are bad people, when it's really the after-the-fact, nice-guys become bitter and bad people just like traumatized villians in a Disney movie, after seeing their chances ruined by girls who date abusive, alpha-male jocks and always complaining about their abusive boyfriends yet repetitively only dating abusive boyfriends. You see it is that many women are attracted to the type of brute who ironically gives them those kind of unforeseen complications.

Honestly, if you want people to believe you're not smart enough to tell the difference between one's skin color and your choice to adopt a political identity, well, okay, I admit there are plenty who will take you up on that point. More practically, though, bullshit, the biggest stupidity is the choice to posture yourself as so damnably stupid.

I think it is you who is posturing yourself as damnably stupid, because I keep saying that incel, stands for involuntary celibate, and you keep saying it is a choice.
Then you make loose assertions that if someone is involuntary celibate, they automatically agree with all incels on all views, and that all MRAs are clone robot armies who agree with each other on all views 100%, this seems reflected in your perception that men are to blame of all the worlds problems, as if they are all one unified hivemind entity who agrees with each other 100% on all issues.

If the reason one is "incel" relies on some conspiratorial bit about how society hates males, or whatever, you're not an incel, but, rather, a volcel.

I don't see the logic in this statement.

You need to learn to be able to deal with people. Do you understand nobody can be obliged to your enjoyment? That's a key difference right there: Society cannot provide you girlfriends. And, honestly, like I said, behavior can make a man physically unattractive.

It is true that society cannot provide girlfriends, however it can stop making it so damnably difficult by stop perpetuating this primitive culture of a toxically masculine mindset of saying all males must rigidly obey gender norms and be perfect specimens. Rap music is the ultimate essence of this, but it is in all parts of culture not just rap.

This is another basic difference you really ought to be capable of figuring out: When a white supremacist says "black means rapist, criminal, or watermelon", that is a white supremacist talking about someone else. When incels raise the identity of violence and revolution, that's incels talking about themselves. Society tried not taking the incel movement seriously, and a bunch of people are dead because of that. Now incels have attention and we're not surprised to encounter this pathetic flock who want to talk the talk but pretend otherwise.

The same could be argued of rap music, that blacks portray themselves as criminals. But I would like to reclaim the word and say not all incels are rapists. The word incel means involuntary celibate. Now mathematically speaking, someone who doesn't get any, in a place where prostitution is made illegal, might eventually lose their sense of morality and do some criminal things. Just like blacks, who are living in poverty, mathematically, poor people might lose their sense of morality and do some criminal things.

You're the one who invoked a "binary 'us vs. them' thought and feminist man-blaming delusion". Do you know what "binary" means?

Your "binary 'us vs. them' thought and feminist man-blaming delusion" is your own straw man; if it was true, the other part of the binary set—i.e., those other elements of society—then there would be actual evidence of it.

You accused me of wanting to purge heterosexuals. And now you post gobble-de-gook deflecting from your own accusation, which was nonsense to begin with.

It's like if I was in a court room, and you accused me of murder, and the cops and judges exonerate me and say "Your murder accusations are false, we have evidence that such and such was at this place and time, it is on record."
And then you say "Oh but by the way, did you know that they have some library fees overdue, it means they are a bad person."

Wow, you couldn't even answer the question.

Should we record that as unwilling, or unable?

I don't remember any question, mostly insults.
Wait I do remember the question now, you were saying would all women hate me for standing up for myself.
The question was, does the complaining about sexual double standard and inequal treatment towards males, anger women enough not to date me.
Yes I believe many narcissistic, american women would be angered that I complain about being a male, they would tell me to "man up" and get confidence, stop complaining, suck it up, tell me about how bad periods and pregnancy is, and then blame me for all the horrible things my ancestors did to them in their supposed past lives.

Most males don't waste their time making their sexual ineptitude into a political platform.

I wouldn't make it the main profile point of my political platform, as american society is backwards and primitive and judgey about those things. It is akin to a bee-like hive where males are expected to take it, not complain, not share their feelings and take whatever second class status american society affords to them. If a male shows a sign of weakness he is stripped and shamed of his stoic title. Even for standing up for Mens Rights he is declared to be a bad person. Then feminism is praised for its equality, a monopoly saying only feminism can bring equality, mens rights=bad and evil, or so they say.

It is, even now, at least slightly astonishing when ostensible men try this line, because its formulaic effect is the argument that men are complacent slaves who have no agency of their own if they ... what, aren't provided satisfactory girlfriends? Stop denigrating men like that.

My argument was not that, but fair enough you misunderstood what I meant due to me using the word "provided".
So I will make it clear, american society views males as worthless and disposable, they are generally unloved and unwanted by most. The state offers them a deal, you work a lot as our slave, we will give you the promise of eventually making enough money that materialist females will want to be with you.

I'll worry about it when these mythical female narcissists have a realistic shot at running the world.

[
fin
]​

It may be necessary at least in the near future, in order to prevent the greedy men who run this show to stop destroying the planet.

 

[gamelord]

Gamelord. Society WAS originally all male until God castrated one male for killing his partner. ☺

Was this in the Bible, or one of your made up stories?

 

[gamelord]

That's why you must first connect mentally. Forget the boring stuff.

Feminist emasculation.
What happened to the days of good old-fashioned lust?
Oh yeah I forgot, females are allowed to be sluts, but if a male is a slut he is an evil sexist.

It sounds to me like you're angry at women because you feel like you're entitled to sex with women. Your attitude strikes me as one in which you think women owe it to you to have sex with you, and you're frustrated that they don't seem to be playing by the rules you expect them to play by. You're a man, so women should give you sex, you think. And if they don't, then they are stuck up bitches.

Here's the thing: you don't own women. In fact, you don't own anybody. Nobody else is obliged to satisfy your "natural instincts of lust". You have no right to expect or demand that of women, or anybody.

If you want to get laid, start by making yourself a better person. Then somebody might find you attractive enough to give their fully informed consent.

It is the free country, I have a right to feel angry and frustrated that my needs are not met.
Make myself a better person?
I have always been a good person and better than most. And yet, here I am, still alone most of the time.

 

[gamelord]

[2/3​

If you paid attention to what you had written, perhaps it might be more clear. Consider we're about to review something like four posts, because this is a common disruption within your posting; you can't seem to keep on subject from post to post.

I cannot compress my posts sometimes because of the 10000 character limit.

Your assertion of moral hypocrisy involves two basic points, that "hot girls who reject men and claim that men only lust for them, meanwhile these same hot girls only date people nearly as hot as they are" (#7). It's a largely incoherent bit, which is why the response (#9) only points out the functional problems with your illustration. In #18, you fail to clarify, and #28 goes on to confuse you. The short form is that your pretense of moral hypocrisy is bullshit, and you're telling people more about yourself than saying anything about women or men, but you're going out of your way to tell them an awful story as if to warn them away from you.

I would say your bits are mostly incoherent.
For example,
I say "Hot girls shames man for wanting her because she is hot. Yet, observing this girl's dating patterns, she only dates hot guys herself."
This would seem to be clear cut case of moral hypocrisy, seemingly like Yahweh's "Do as I say not as I do."
Yet you try to explain it away with evolution.
It would be similar to a rapist saying "But my evolutionary instincts made me rape."
If that does not fly in debate, then using evolutionary excuses for bad behavior should not fly for females either.

That, for instance, would be either a laughable conspiracy theory, or, well, masculinity as a fundamental identity component. Behavior can make a man physically unattractive. Figure it out.

Yes because a man must be confident, etc. Even though idea of a confident animal in a hostile city is an oxymoron. What i mean is that, man is out of his element, placed inside a land of infinite rules and toxic cubicles, and then expected to be happy and confident.

Actually, that has more to do with ignorance, fear, and belligerence as fundamental components of masculinity.

Fair enough. Although in America today, there are a large majority of ignorant females, though this could be explained due to male feminization and female masculinzation.

There's a lot that goes into what constitutes a light slap, as well as what counts for gender norms, but do you have any idea why explicit lesbian intimacy is so damn popular among cisgendered, heterosexual males? No, really, I can actually remember a day, squar' in heady days of the Oregon Gay Fray, when the otherwise sufficiently invisible lesbian was only to be seen onstage while doing her sister.

The answer is obvious. Because males are raised to be physically unattractive and wear drab clothes with no makeup. Furthermore their toxic masculinity actually damages their physical appearance and makes them physically ugly. Plus they smell bad, so gay porn reminds them of the smells. Whereas lesbian porn is all that is good with the world, makes them escape from their male hell.
I would hazard a guess as to why lesbian porn is more popular than actual lesbians in the office, because in porn they are in fantasy land, removed from reality, while in real life they see lesbians and get jealous, and it reminds them they are stuck in male hell.

And don't even try to say that male hell is a myth, you've literally proved it with your ridiculous rock videos.

Have you idea how much misogyny is actually vagina envy?

I would say 99% percent, as indicated by my above comments.

This is the world men made; this is what men wanted—

That is a delusional fallacy. No. It is the world the rich elite wanted, to keep the majority of males down. And yes any men who are brainwashed to support the dogma are the enemy, same as any women brainwashed to support the dogma are the enemy.

—go ahead and make that pitch: Go ahead and invite the woman of your affection to move in with you, but tell her in that moment that you expect to measure her cost in how much you enjoy her.

This really isn't rocket science here. I'm not going to spend money on a woman who doesn't love me. And its not prostitution, I'm talking about a woman who genuinely loves me and isn't just using me for money, though those are hard to find these days.

You want a hooker, go get one. And no, society isn't going to provide you one of these workers; you need to go find one and obtain their services for your own self.

All I ask is that society does not make it explicitly illegal and impossible, which it does. Never asked society to automatically give me a suprise hooker on my birthday, although it would be nice.

Meanwhile, do you think it will be easier to go to court and evict her for not fucking you frequently or well enough, or to simply divorce her? You're describing marriage as it existed for most of the prior century.

You are over complicating this thing. I can tell in my gut if a woman loves me. It is more than her not being in the mood for sex. I can tell the difference between her not being in the mood for sex, and someone who doesn't love me and is just pretending to like me to get money out of me.

As far as marriage, marriage is for children. It has no benefit to adults. It is just so people can't just escape raising their kids. The current marriage system is meant to enslave males, as males will beg not to divorce and obey any ultimatum, in order for the wife not to leave them. Because if the wife leaves them, then a. they may not get to spend very much time with their kids and b. still have to pay a ton of money to the kids that they rarely get to see, and also pay a ton of money to the ex they hate. Which of course is absolutely, totally sexist.

My ideal system, would be that a male is allowed to have sex with other girls if his wife does not put out. This would decrease the likelyhood of rape and divorce. But sadly we live in a close-minded, Puritan religious system where such an act is shamed.

See, the easy line here is to point out that you seem to hang out with a lot of queers while advocating a really weird reiteration of enforced binary sexuality.

The more complicated line is to tell you to stop hurting yourself and just come out, already.

[
cont.
]​

I dont know how you see it like that, I am obviously trying to erode the current gender dogma, which puts males into a corner and tells them that males are not allowed to challenge traditional male gender norms.
And yes all americans are guilty of this, men and women.
For instance, women on fetlife mostly say they only want dominant males. So any male who is submissive is looked down on by america. Any male who doesnt obey the macho dogma is looked down on in america. And its a double standard where women can do masculine jobs and wear masculine clothes, yet males are shamed for any sign of femininity.

 

[Seattle]

Obviously. Why would I want a woman who is disgusted while we are having sex?
It's just we live in a culture where both feminism and patriarchy shames sex and lustful thought. It's a land of insane Puritans running amok. They have magazines in the grocery store that talk about sex and sex positions, but lo-and behold if you actually talk about sex out loud, you are a creep and a perv. It's american split-minded insanity. It's like how Japan is sexually dysfunctional and incel, but has panties at vending machine, obsessed with porn, but the genitals are pixellated, a country that is completely sexually dysfunctional.

Yes, Japan is weird, in general. Where society is uptight about sex you get that kind of thing. As you mentioned, porn in the U.S. is more popular for similar reasons.

That doesn't effect every individual however. Plenty of people have healthy sex lives, plenty don't, some have them from time to time and some never do. It's about individuals and not about society.

If a guy had a girlfriend that turned out to be pretty uptight about sex and that never changed, he would probably find another girlfriend where that wasn't a problem. Women who are comfortable in their skin and who have control of their lives tend to enjoy sex, just like guys.

In America, the land where 50% of marriages end in divorce?

That has little to do with sex and more to do with choice. More people stayed together, in the past, for societal pressures and are better off now. This has nothing to do with lack of male love. Men instigate divorces as well as women.

Many of these people are super cruel and unfriendly.

Maybe they just have opinions similar to yours. You don't seem to like all that many people, going by your comments, and some of your views could be considered cruel don't you think?

 

[Seattle]

The answer is obvious. Because males are raised to be physically unattractive and wear drab clothes with no makeup. Furthermore their toxic masculinity actually damages their physical appearance and makes them physically ugly. Plus they smell bad, so gay porn reminds them of the smells. Whereas lesbian porn is all that is good with the world, makes them escape from their male hell.

These weren't my comments you were responding to but I'll comment anyway. You keep saying that males are physically unattractive and wear drab clothes with no makeup. Obviously this isn't a "fact" that most people agree with.

I prefer women who wear little to no makeup. You've never said it specifically (or maybe you have) but if you are a transvestite why not just admit it and admit that all of your comments about "america" have little to do with "america" and a lot to do with a transvestite perspective?

My ideal system, would be that a male is allowed to have sex with other girls if his wife does not put out. This would decrease the likelyhood of rape and divorce. But sadly we live in a close-minded, Puritan religious system where such an act is shamed.

You claim that you want someone who loves you but really you just want someone who "put's out". There is really very little interest in women coming from your posts. If you were more honest with yourself in this regard maybe you would feel less rejection from the women that you really don't want in the first place?

For instance, women on fetlife mostly say they only want dominant males. So any male who is submissive is looked down on by america. Any male who doesnt obey the macho dogma is looked down on in america. And its a double standard where women can do masculine jobs and wear masculine clothes, yet males are shamed for any sign of femininity.

Your perspective of "america" is skewed. "America" isn't "fetlife". If you want to be femine, be femine and dress however you want to. It's not up to America to embrace you. If enough guys start wearing makeup and dresses so that it is more commonplace, they would be more accepted by "America".

It doesn't work the other way around. Most guys aren't dying for the chance to wear dresses and makeup and most who are, are hoping to attract a male, not a female.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Alpha males turn me on. They make beta males cower!

They also have gunz!

 

[James R]

gamelord:

Oh yeah I forgot, females are allowed to be sluts, but if a male is a slut he is an evil sexist.

As far as I can tell, men still cop a lot less criticism and judgment for sleeping around than women do.

It is the free country, I have a right to feel angry and frustrated that my needs are not met.

You don't actually need somebody to have sex with you, you know. You just want that, which is a different thing.

But it's not other people's fault if they don't want to have sex with you. Don't you think it's about time you looked at yourself and started to think about why people might find you unattractive?

Make myself a better person?
I have always been a good person and better than most.

No doubt that your hero, Eliot Rodger, felt the same way, right up to when he decided to murder innocent people. And, disturbingly, I have yet to see anything from you to say that you think that what he did was wrong. Rather, it seems like you idolise him. And you wonder why a woman might think you're dangerous.

That "better than most" thing you've got going there is dangerous. You're not better than other people. They don't owe you on account of your superiority. You aren't entitled to do with them what you will. They don't deserve your condemnation or enmity if they refuse to satisfy your sexual desires.

 

[Write4U]

But it's not other people's fault if they don't want to have sex with you. Don't you think it's about time you looked at yourself and started to think about why people might find you unattractive?

It's not physical. Women are differet from men in that they do not necessarily look at physical assets but rather at mental assets. Start there.
Attractive women don't need to be told they are attractive, they know they are attractive. An unattractive woman doesn't want to be told she is unattractive, she knows she is unattractive.

All women want to be told they are smart and delightful and that is the most important thing. That's true flattery and will get you much closer.

 

[gamelord]

All everyone posts is mostly lies and false nonsense.

I feel like I'm battling a fleet of enemy bogeys, all on my lonesome and I am a F22. This is the song in my head right now

 

[gamelord]

That has little to do with sex and more to do with choice. More people stayed together, in the past, for societal pressures and are better off now. This has nothing to do with lack of male love. Men instigate divorces as well as women.

Such men are fools. What man would divorce and thus pay alimony for the rest of his days, unless his wife was unbearable.

Maybe they just have opinions similar to yours. You don't seem to like all that many people, going by your comments, and some of your views could be considered cruel don't you think?

Cant remember any of my views which are cruel. Second I may hate humanity in general, but I hate humanity because they abuse their friends, so I try not to abuse my friends like that community often does.

These weren't my comments you were responding to but I'll comment anyway. You keep saying that males are physically unattractive and wear drab clothes with no makeup. Obviously this isn't a "fact" that most people agree with.

You pick out a couple hot guys in your head, and then extrapolate and imagine all guys are hot. That is what most people do it seems.
The vast majority of guys are not hot to women, this has been confirmed and I have personally surveyed many women on this.

The other thing is, makeup is a technique women use to enhance their features, robbing males of this technique is cheating, giving women a seductive advantage.
And you might say "wearing makeup is legal" but the social attitude of making it a negative idea, reduce its seductive advantage of males.
Same with the drab clothes thing, society looks negatively on males wearing pretty clothes reducing its seductive advatnage, giving women two key advantages.
There are some males (not all, some) who have a kind of "bland" features where everything just blends in and looks like a soppy mess. These kind of males need makeup because they dont have striking features especially around the eyes. You ever see predator animals, like snakes, birds of prey, tigers, etc? They all have black eyeliner around their eyes. Denying males makeup is denying their ability to peacock, it makes males look weak.

I prefer women who wear little to no makeup. You've never said it specifically (or maybe you have) but if you are a transvestite why not just admit it and admit that all of your comments about "america" have little to do with "america" and a lot to do with a transvestite perspective?

Women are prettier inherently, whereas males need makeup more to compensate for their lack of physical beauty. But sadly we live in a culture where it is the reverse.

You claim that you want someone who loves you but really you just want someone who "put's out". There is really very little interest in women coming from your posts. If you were more honest with yourself in this regard maybe you would feel less rejection from the women that you really don't want in the first place?

False statement. My comment was about male divorce. I want a woman who loves me and who puts out, what is so hard to see about it?

Your perspective of "america" is skewed. "America" isn't "fetlife". If you want to be femine, be femine and dress however you want to. It's not up to America to embrace you. If enough guys start wearing makeup and dresses so that it is more commonplace, they would be more accepted by "America".

It doesn't work the other way around. Most guys aren't dying for the chance to wear dresses and makeup and most who are, are hoping to attract a male, not a female.

If I said in the 60's, if I want to be black and go to white cities, its not up to America to embrace me, you would call me a racist. Yet somehow you get a free ticket to use the same cop-out argument as that. Defending gender norms is rarely acceptable.

And yeah that is why I lost faith in men, they are slaves who support the status quo and male brainwashing slavery. Males are brainwashed into gender norms and fearful to disobey, wont stand up for it, wont take a stand for male beauty, I lost my faith in them long ago and hold them with resentment.

My ideal world would be a world of only women. No need for fascist laws to enforce rules, much less criminals, and safe to walk the streets. No wars, no greedy businesses. There would be businesses, but these would be fair and good entities. In this world there would be a small amount of males to breed the human race, but that's it.

Alpha males turn me on. They make beta males cower!

Brittany spears turns me on.

gamelord:


As far as I can tell, men still cop a lot less criticism and judgment for sleeping around than women do.

Not according to feminism, feminism shames male sexuality.
But yes some men slut shame women. Basically because they want a virgin woman all to themselves.
Feminists slut shame men, basically because they hate male sexuality.

You don't actually need somebody to have sex with you, you know. You just want that, which is a different thing.

No its a need. Studies show that lonely celibates die young.

But it's not other people's fault if they don't want to have sex with you. Don't you think it's about time you looked at yourself and started to think about why people might find you unattractive?

It is others fault, if they judge me based on lies about me that arent true, or if they judge me based on unrealistic societal standards theyve been brainwashed to adhere to, or if they judge me because I go outside one day looking bad because I'm not wearing makeup, because of societal pressures getting the best of me causing me to lose the courage to wear makeup one day.

No doubt that your hero, Eliot Rodger, felt the same way, right up to when he decided to murder innocent people. And, disturbingly, I have yet to see anything from you to say that you think that what he did was wrong. Rather, it seems like you idolise him. And you wonder why a woman might think you're dangerous.

A total lie and fabrication, this is the level of hysteria and nonsense of American politicking. I said I agree with Eliot on one view point, that the dating zone is unfair, and so, according to your warped perception of reality, somehow he is my hero and I idolize him?

Let me make one thing clear.

I hate his guts, in fact there is a guy I hate in real life who looks the same as him, which makes me hate him even more.
Second he was a pathetic villian who failed his mission and only killed his own guys, third he did insane torture which I hate. In fact if he was still alive I'd kill him myself, i would choke him to death with my bare hands. Screw his idea of a man's only world, what I want is the exact opposite, a woman's only world. You know that scene in batman where Joker pushes that Electro-man-badguy out of a building? I want it to be that, except its Eliot Rodgers being pushed out a building.

+1 for truth, +0 for the lies.

Fake news loses today.

That "better than most" thing you've got going there is dangerous. You're not better than other people. They don't owe you on account of your superiority. You aren't entitled to do with them what you will. They don't deserve your condemnation or enmity if they refuse to satisfy your sexual desires.

I am better than most people. For one, I dont believe in religion, two I dont believe in modern politcs, three I dont believe in American gender norms brainwashing, four I am against animal abuse and meat industry. That makes me better than 99 percent of Americans. Fifth its their fault they dont sexualize me, by forcing me into a society with rigid gender norms where I am often not allowed to express myself as I see fit.

All women want to be told they are smart and delightful and that is the most important thing. That's true flattery and will get you much closer.

Yeah but what about me? I want to be told by women, that I am smart and delightful and not just in a platonic way. Cause it seems like when a woman says that to you, she means it only in a platonic way.

 

[TheFrogger]

A straight woman wants a man. Men are b*st*rds. If you want a woman, break her heart. She'll never get over you.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Brittany spears turns me on.

I'll take your word for it, yet don't you have a disdain for her was well?

Please do not consider this an argument but you said pop singers basically give off bad vibes. Hence, wouldn't there be some ambivalence towards her then?

 

[Write4U]

Yeah but what about me? I want to be told by women, that I am smart and delightful and not just in a platonic way. Cause it seems like when a woman says that to you, she means it only in a platonic way.

That's a start, no. Since the beginning of time the male have had to show the female that they are worthy to father her children. If you cannot do this by being Mr. Atlas, then do it by being "smarter than the average bear".